The invaders also have dragged god in to their messed up war. Bush called it a crusade almost from the beginning although it could be argued that he didn't know what he was saying. But it wasn't just Bush. Who can forget the words of Marine Colonel Brandl, "The enemy has got a face. He's called Satan. He lives in Falluja. And we're going to destroy him."

Awesome! Now how about you start quoteing what the common soldier has to say about Iraq? I wana see how many "religious fanitics" are on our side.

His troops then barbecued the civilian occupants of the city with white phosphorus.

Oh? So where is the evidence supporting this? I know we use WP as an illumination round yet I could have sworn that the Army no longer uses Whisky Pete as an offensive weapon. Even if we did, I want to see the evidence that shows we used it STRICTLY against civilian targets.

I also want you to prove that the "civilians" we killed weren't insurgents who's weapons were taken by their surviving comrads.

Hell I want you to prove that we are purpously attacking civilians. When you're able to do that I want to see where you got your evidence from.

When you're able to do that, then you can state we Soldiers are "BBQing" civilians on purpose.

It is true that most of the casualties in Iraq have been the result of civilian on civilian violence. It is not known how many have died in total, never mind how many were killed by the invading and occupying forces. What can be stated with certainty is that a Catholic (Blair) and a Methodist (Bush) ordered the bombing of targets that would result in collateral damage.

Again, show me evidence that these targets were strictly civilian. I want evidence that these targets had absolutly NO military value whatsoever.

These acts were in breach of the UN Charter, the Geneva Convention and the 6th Commandment. Whether you believe these crimes were justifiable in order to stave off an immediate threat to our countries is irrelevent. The motivation for the invasion and destruction of Iraq should only be taken into consideration during sentencing.

Unless the targets were justified in which case your claim holds no water.

Personally I do not think that either Blair or Bush were motivated by their religion to commit their attrocities.

What attrocities did they personaly have a hand in? I

However, I am not certain that the wars would have had the popular backing of the American and British people if Iraqis were Christians.

I am not going to argue with you MPT; I am tired of talking to dogmatic people who believe everything their politicians tell them. Iâ€™ve been selling the idea that sometimes Presidents and Ministers lie for many years now and I think I have probably convinced all the ones I am going to, or at least all the ones I want to. You want to believe that your Pres didn't personally launch an illegal war on a sovereign nation then fine. I hold a different opinion and I think those people who still believe that Bush is going to heaven are not likely to change their minds now.

Pastafarians don't hold with dogma as everything is theoretically possible just with varying degrees of probability. Whichever long-shot you back is of little interest to me.

If you would like to read some things and perhaps learn new facts then Iâ€™d recommend starting with the Geneva conventions and the UN charter. Also reading about the Nuremberg trials would be informative. Also, as for other things you donâ€™t know try reading the US military magazine â€œField Artilleryâ€ which had an interesting article in 2005 about using WP as a weapon in Fallujah. I assume that you wonâ€™t believe the opinion of eye-witnesses who say things you donâ€™t like so maybe reading what your military writes will open your eyes. In fact, just read as much as you can, itâ€™ll help.

The theory of Christianity, and religion in general, has no proof, true.

However, there is a lttle thing called "Faith"

I'm sorry, but no Christian, or at least no intelligent Christian, has ever claimed that there is proof of religion beyond the Bible and the fact that there are several followers.

Leaving now, before the battle starts up again.

I understand about faith.

Similarly there is no absolute proof that Tony Blair actually believed that UK targets could be hit in 45 minutes with WMDs. Likewise there is no absolute proof that this wasn't a cynically deception in order to promote a pre-planned war. Taking either position and refusing to be moved is an act of faith.

I wasn't sure whether Blair's protestations of being deceived by bad intelligence were true or just more of his lies. (You might not know it but Blair is a really good liar so its hard to tell when he is being truthy). I am now more on the "cynical deception" side of this argument after I had the opportunity to put a question to the man himself and watch his expression. I'm now reasonably sure that he is a liar and deserves to be punished for the crime of aggression.

Oh I see, so because I'm religious I should accept whatever you say with 100% conviction that you are right. Because I'm religious I can't ask you for proof regarding the wholesale slaughter of civilians by us soldiers.

Listen kid, if I had said something like "Prove to me God doesn't exist!" Then yes, call me a religious fanatic. One does not have to prove a negative; it's damn near common sense.

If I had asked you to Prove to me that the Military ISN'T ruthlessly killing civilians, again you could call me a jackass.

However I asked YOU for proof that the Military WAS ruthlessly killing civilians. Why? Because you stated we were. Now the burden of proof rests on you. However judging by your inane little rant I doubt I'll get far.

I am not going to argue with you MPT

As another member of the forum asked me a few times, why are you a member of a political/religious discussion forum if you aren't going to argue?

I am tired of talking to dogmatic people who believe everything their politicians tell them.

Yeah so am I!

Iâ€™ve been selling the idea that sometimes Presidents and Ministers lie for many years now and I think I have probably convinced all the ones I am going to, or at least all the ones I want to. You want to believe that your Pres didn't personally launch an illegal war on a sovereign nation then fine.

Mah? See I could have sworn I had asked you on what sort of atrocities the leaders of this war personally committed. AFAIK Pres Bush didn't sign an act commanding his military to round up entire towns and slaughter every tenth person whenever we soldiers are attacked in said town.

I didn't ask you to prove to me if the war is legal or not, I just want you to show me what evilness we soldiers are up too

I hold a different opinion and I think those people who still believe that Bush is going to heaven are not likely to change their minds now.

Yeah, something tells me you don't believe in heaven in the first place. Nonetheless, we Catholics hope everyone on this earth makes it to heaven to be with God. However it isn't our place to judge who is damned or not.

Pastafarians don't hold with dogma as everything is theoretically possible just with varying degrees of probability. Whichever long-shot you back is of little interest to me.

...WTF? You do know that there is no religion, which follows the FSM right? This is all made up kido.

If you would like to read some things and perhaps learn new facts then Iâ€™d recommend starting with the Geneva conventions and the UN charter.

You also forgot the UCMJ and the Constitution. Two very important documents all U.S. Soldiers are expected to follow or defend. But thatâ€™s cool seeing as how you aren't even old enough to enlist yet.

Right?

Also reading about the Nuremberg trials would be informative. Also, as for other things you donâ€™t know try reading the US military magazine â€œField Artilleryâ€ which had an interesting article in 2005 about using WP as a weapon in Fallujah.

Again, what does the Nuremberg trials have to do with current US engagements? As for "Field Artillery" magazine (damn gun bunnies. Whereâ€™s my MP Monthly?) Why don't you show us a link? You know, hard proof?

I assume that you wonâ€™t believe the opinion of eye-witnesses who say things you donâ€™t like so maybe reading what your military writes will open your eyes. In fact, just read as much as you can, itâ€™ll help.

When I said I wasn't going to argue, I actually stated I wasn't going to argue with you. What is the point? What do I stand to gain? I mean, you already assume I am a child (flattering actually, it's my birthday and I feel old) and are already swearing at me. You are ignorant of the law, I can't be bothered educating you and see little point. Can you give me a good reason to argue with you or educate you?